Stronachs Logo

Insights

Although it is becoming less common, many employers still offer generous insurance benefits to employees that provide financial assistance should they become unable to carry out their role due to long-term sickness or disability. Such permanent health insurance policies allow the employee to recover the benefits payable provided that the employee meets the often strict criteria imposed by the insurer. Such schemes are clearly of great value to affected employees: as long as the employee remains unable to work (as defined in the terms of the individual policy), benefits may continue up to normal retirement age. This can potentially be many years. Most of these policies will require the employee to remain in employment in order to get the benefit of the PHI policy.

The protection of workers and employees against detriment and dismissal by an employer on the ground that they have “blown the whistle” or made a protected disclosure is well known. What is perhaps less recognised is that, as well as the fact that the employer can be held liable for unlawful actions of an individual’s co-workers in subjecting him or her to whistle-blowing related detriment, that an individual’s co-workers can also be personally liable for such detriment.

Yesterday, 10 October, the Supreme Court released its much-anticipated judgement in the Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd appeal, known widely in the press as “the gay cake case”. The case concerned Mr Lee, who had approached Ashers in Belfast, a family-run business whose owners were Christians that held the belief that the only form of marriage consistent with the teachings of the bible was between a man and a woman, to bake him a cake with the slogan “Support Gay Marriage”. Having initially taken his order Ashers subsequently declined to proceed with it and refunded Mr Lee his money and informed him that they could not bake the requested cake as it was inconsistent with their religious beliefs. Mr Lee brought claims for direct discrimination on the grounds of (i) sexual orientation and (ii) political opinion (as is possible in Northern Ireland). Although his claims were successful in the lower courts, the Supreme Court has reversed these decisions issuing a clear and well-reasoned judgement which gets to the heart of what amounts to direct discrimination.

The demand for flexible working is on the rise and it is increasingly clear that employers in the UK will need to respond to this challenge in order to attract and retain staff.  A recent Smarter Working Hub survey revealed that 47% of employees do not have flexible working encouraged at their workplace, yet 67% of employees wish they were offered this opportunity. 

This week, the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) released their final report on EEA migration in the UK. The report was commissioned by the Home Secretary in 2017, and its purposes were 1) to look at the impact of EEA migration on the economy and society of the UK and 2) to gather evidence to assist in the development of a new immigration system for the UK post-Brexit.

As has been widely reported in the press this week, the Young Women’s Trust has released the results of their annual survey, which noted that, 100 years on from when the first women got the vote in the UK, there is still widespread inequality for young women. The survey, which questioned a representative sample of 18 – 30 year olds in England and Wales, found in particular:

This month, the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) launched new guidance on employee references, an area which employers are often apprehensive about. In a previous Insight post, we discussed the potential GDPR (i.e. data protection) issues which can arise in relation to references.  The ACAS guidance is a useful summary for employers regarding some of their other obligations in relation to the provision of references and the potential risks arising in preparing and providing these.

The plight of the over-burdened “always on” British worker feverishly checking emails on their long commute home and struggling with incipient mental illness has recently been highlighted by certain international comparisons. These demonstrate a marked contrast in the legal regimes applicable to workers in other countries in relation to the regulation of working hours and the positive duty on employers to ensure that their employees do not work excessive hours.

Chambers Leading Firm 2019

Contact Info

ABERDEEN OFFICE
28 Albyn Place, Aberdeen AB10 1YL
Tel: +44 1224 845845

 

INVERNESS OFFICE
Camas House, Fairways Business Park,
Inverness IV2 6AA
Tel: + 44 1463 713225